panasonic 50vt20 .. will it be crowned king ?

[hammill]

maxflinn:the oppo was considered the best by most other review sites too ...
To be honest, I doubt very much that I could tell the difference between my Oppo and the Sony in normal use. The Oppo supported DVD-A, SACD and HDCD and was available in multi region for both DVD and Blu-Ray, plus it was a fast loader so it fitted my requirements perfectly - the Sony did not. I could care less that it did not get 5*, I am not trying to impress anyone.

 

[Anonymous]

so what size was this sony ? 46in ?

 

[Andrew Everard]

43cm wide, like most of the company's Blu-ray players.

 

[Anonymous]

hmmm , youve chirped up andrew , must have had a nice lunch

..

but its the woundrous test sony im inquiring about , 46in ? or 52in?

 

[Andrew Everard]

maxflinn:hmmm , youve chirped up andrew , must have had a nice lunch

..

Have been here all the time, max, and do you suspect I was eating lunch at 4pm or is it another of those things you just know...

maxflinn:but its the woundrous test sony im inquiring about , 46in ? or 52in?

Oh you mean the set you know couldn't possibly be as good as the Panasonic the review of which you haven't read either? It was a 46, and not at all covered in wounds.

 

[Anonymous]

ah , so the 46in sony is £460 more expensive than the 50vt20 ?

so the 52hx903 which is closer in size is what , around £1000 more expensive ?

lol , i give up guys , you win

 

[Andrew Everard]

maxflinn:lol , i give up guys , you win

Was it a competition? But yes, looks like the Sony is about two and a half.

 

[Anonymous]

found 2 reviews online , both found the sony to be very good , but not as good as the pana overall , crosstalk and the price , £950 more , being the main reasons why they rated the panasonic higher ...

havnt read the review but im assuming whfi didnt find this seemingly obvious crosstalk ? and of course , the price difference ? sshhh , lets forget about that for this review

..

solid work guys

 

[Andrew Everard]

And he's off again, ladies and gentlemen...

 

[Clare Newsome]

Indeed. He hasn't read the boxout on crosstalk that's specifically included in the September issue.......

 

[Deleted member 2457]

Max, don't stress on it no 3D tv is worth it.

 

[Anonymous]

I've been reading this stream, and wow! has this unearthed some serious comment.

Well, here are my pennies-worth, although I'll start by saying I haven't read the reviews yet as I do not subscribe (been buying WHF for a long time, though). But I do have a view on WHF scoring (an old topic I know), but will hopefully be somewhat relevant to this argument.

Firstly, I am not going to be vendor / technology biased, just a view on what I have seen in previous issues of WHF.

July 2010 issue, 46 - 47 inch Supertest. Here we had three TVs with a 5-star rating:

LG 47LE8900 (£2000); Samsung UE46C8000 (£2200); Sony KDL-46EX503 (£1200).

The LG & Sony both had poor sound as the main 'Against' comment. The Sony won out based on cost over the LG (by a margin of £800). However, the Samsung had poorer contrast levels and a touch overexuberance on colours as the 'Against' comments and was £1000 more expensive than the Sony.

So, how did the Samsung above keep its 5-Star rating?

I ask this as I now go to the May 2010 issue, 40 - 42 inch Supertest. Here we had three TVs with a 5-star rating:

Philips 40PFL9704 (£1800); Samsung UE40C7000 (£1800); Sony KDL-40EX503 (£900).

However, the Panasonic TX-42G20 (£1100) got a 4-Star rating based on (and I quote): 'The main reason we settled on a four stars for the Panasonic is its cost'. By 'cost', we are talking about a difference of £200!

So, going back to the July issue, I ask again how the Samsung could have maintained its 5-Star rating when it was both marginally inferior to the Sony AND a THOUSAND POUNDS MORE EXPENSIVE!

I think the above might be relevant to the current argument, as Clare did mention that the WHF spend days and days deciding on the 4-Star rating for the Panasonic. One might conclude from this that the differences between the Sony and Panasonic were marginal - so why does it not maintain a 5-Star rating as the Samsung did in July?

I obviously wait with bated breath to read the reviews and see if I am talking a load of nonsense, but I really just wanted to get what I see as a discrepancy in scoring off my chest (from both the July and May issues of WHF).

I feel much better now...

Pauled.

 

[Clare Newsome]

pauled51:
One might conclude from this that the differences between the Sony and Panasonic were marginal

Nope - the Sony's clearly better. The endless discussions were about the Panasonic's extra size and lower price.

But we kept coming back to the fact that, having seen the Sony, no-one in the entire team would have bought the Panasonic - they would have spent the extra cash for the HX903.

And that's the key. When two products are very similar in performance, cost is more of an issue (see G20 vs EX503), especially at the more budget end of the market - where a £200 price difference is more than 25% premium.

But when a product is clearly better for performance, it needs to be established whether that extra performance is worth the (probably) extra money it costs.

And you're selectively quoting the July issue. The test verdict (p45) clearly says the LG and Samsung TVs are the best in the test, and deserve their premium price.

 

[TheHomeCinemaCentre]

What Hi-Fi is a magazine and the reviews and comments they make are not gospel. It is an opinion and to that end not fact. I would suggest - as many others have - that the reviews should be used as a guide and in conjunction with your own assessment.

While I agree with many of the reviews in the magazine I disagree with several as well. This is the same for other publications and review sites in this industry and others. Similarly I agree and disagree with my staff / peers about the merits of certain products, this is the nature of hi-fi and why the forum thrives.

I eagerly await our Sony screen now, as I too have been underwhelmed by a large part of the current range.

 

[grifz]

Does this mean philips tv,s are still the closest to the kuro in pq

 

[Clare Newsome]

Nope - the Panasonic beats the Kuro in some areas; the Sony in others. All covered off in the issue....

 

[Clare Newsome]

TheHomeCinemaCentre:
What Hi-Fi is a magazine and the reviews and comments they make are not gospel. It is an opinion and to that end not fact. I would suggest - as many others have - that the reviews should be used as a guide and in conjunction with your own assessment.

While I agree with many of the reviews in the magazine I disagree with several as well. This is the same for other publications and review sites in this industry and others. Similarly I agree and disagree with my staff / peers about the merits of certain products, this is the nature of hi-fi and why the forum thrives.

I eagerly await our Sony screen now, as I too have been underwhelmed by a large part of the current range.

Hallelujah, a voice of reason

 

[Anonymous]

Clare Newsome:pauled51:
One might conclude from this that the differences between the Sony and Panasonic were marginal

Nope - the Sony's clearly better. The endless discussions were about the Panasonic's extra size and lower price.

But we kept coming back to the fact that, having seen the Sony, no-one in the entire team would have bought the Panasonic - they would have spent the extra cash for the HX903.

And that's the key. When two products are very similar in performance, cost is more of an issue (see G20 vs EX503), especially at the more budget end of the market - where a £200 price difference is more than 25% premium.

But when a product is clearly better for performance, it needs to be established whether that extra performance is worth the (probably) extra money it costs.

And you're selectively quoting the July issue. The test verdict (p45) clearly says the LG and Samsung TVs are the best in the test, and deserve their premium price.

codswallop....

 

[grifz]

The new philips tv is on its way soon to you i here, Then an interesting group test maybe .

 

[Andrew Everard]

maxflinn:codswallop....

So now you're disputing what the review team thought. Do you know you're correct in doing so, or just 'know' you've known better than them what they're thinking all along?

 

[Anonymous]

Andrew Everard:
maxflinn:codswallop....

So now you're disputing what the review team thought. Do you know you're correct in doing so, or just 'know' you've known better than them what they're thinking all along?

...

its codswallop andrew , any 3dtv reviewed to date by whfi has got 5 big shiny stars ..

bar the best one , the one with no crosstalk , all the , lets call em "crosstalkers" get 5 stars , lol

come on mr e , come on , are you not cringing a tad trying to somehow defend this ? seriously andrew ...

 

[Andrew Everard]

maxflinn:come on mr e , come on , are you not cringing a tad trying to somehow defend this ? seriously andrew ...

My gawd, now he thinks he knows what I'm thinking, too.

No, not the slightest, and you are now bordering on the delusional...

 

[Anonymous]

wow the hx903 is that much better - staggering - it obliterates the kuro then

 

[Andrew Everard]

johnb1966:it obliterates the kuro then

No, as Clare said,

Clare Newsome:the Panasonic beats the Kuro in some areas; the Sony in others. All covered off in the issue...

 

[Anonymous]

Andrew Everard:
maxflinn:come on mr e , come on , are you not cringing a tad trying to somehow defend this ? seriously andrew ...

My gawd, now he thinks he knows what I'm thinking, too.

No, not the slightest, and you are now bordering on the delusional...

ya see , i said earlier on in this thread how the mods will try to discredit people , i can read the future too

...

whats always constant though , as has been evident for a year or two now , is that whfi consistently differ to all the other reviewers out there when it comes to tv tests ..

whats also different between whfi and the rest ? whfi has a big shiny magazine that they need to fill with advertisements

, the rest dont

..

now , why did sony stop making plasmas again ?? because they make more money from lcd , as everyone knows ..

lcd sales generate big money , review sites not inextricably linked with the sale of such tvs are perhaps a little more unbiased in their reviews

??

could that be the reason why panasonic and whfi dont appear to be a match made in heaven

?

why all the other tech sites rate the vt20 as the best tv on sale today , bar whfi ?

..

why every panasonic over 40in to be reviewed this year by whfi has only got 4 stars , while the tvs have been getting top marks on all those other independant review sites

..

so many questions eh ? never mind its all a bit of a larf